I strongly object to this proposal. Whilst I do not oppose plastic recycling I do not accept that this is a suitable site for this proposal. It is the wrong site due to the associated, unacceptable environmental impacts.

I believe that Beaconsfield Road is not suitable for heavy vehicles, particularly due to it being a residential road used by families on a daily basis. I am concerned about the conflict of use due to the various users of this road. There are also safety implications associated with this. Children regular ride their bikes on a regular basis on this road and families go for walks along here too. They will no longer be able to do this safely if the proposal is approved.

I also hold grave concerns in relation to the environmental impacts this proposal presents, particularly in respect of the potential/likely water and air pollution that will undoubtedly result.

The visual impacts are also unacceptable. This will ruin the scenic qualities of the landscape for good and the mitigation measures proposed in the EIS are unreliable and uncertain and therefore unsuitable to reduce the huge impacts.

I have been a resident of Moss Vale since 1956 and this proposal will totally impact on my sense of place. I have chosen to live in Moss Vale because I have always felt that it is a lovely, safe and scenic place to live. This proposal will completely change the way I feel and will have adverse impacts not only on Moss Vale but also the Southern Highlands generally.

Not the right site

I am a nearby resident and was born in, educated and lived and worked in the Southern Highlands for 38 years.

To consider this application has any potential is disgusting, and it would seem a sequence of poor judgements have seen it make it this far!

The haphazard EIS from GHD / Plasrefine is appalling for such a supposedly significant project, and I am confident relevant decision makers will see the gaping logistical shortcomings within the document! GHD / Plasrefine in their 'community engagements' have few answers for any questions of any cognitive depth relating to access, physical suitability, community safety, Noise and light pollution, water and air quality protection for the immediate and broader community. The proposal is insensitive to the catastrophic damages it WILL cause to the socioecological nature of this part of the Southern Highlands!

The site Plasrefine is currently land locked with no approved access! GHD suggest that Beaconsfield Rd. will be used for construction and the proposed Braddon Rd. will be established for operational access. Unless they can not acquire the land, in which case they will continue to use Beaconsfield Rd (a cul-de-sac) to access as it is their 'legal allowance'. The portion of land they intend to acquire for access is currently privately held and surely should have been acquired before their application was even considered?! Beaconsfield Rd. at the Northern end at the topographical knoll has approximately 10 residential dwellings from the knoll to the northern end cul-de-sac. The road hardly holds up under light passenger vehicles and they propose to send volumes of heavy articulated trucks up this road. The Northern end of the rd, at the end of the cul-de-sac has a significant topographic decline which drops into the Australian BioResources (Garvan institute) site. There are no specifics as to the engineering to reinforce or 'cut and fill' their proposed access road. It is a considerable section of land to be engineered here! Again, a section which Plasrefine still do not currently hold! Beaconsfield Rd at the Northern end has a blind crest with residents on both sides and the safety for those residents would be jeopardised if construction or ANY heavy vehicles were to frequent what is otherwise a nearly dormant road! It would be negligent to permit such access via Beaconsfield Rd., even for construction purposes, if this debacle were approved. There is a day care facility only hundreds of metres from the Northern end of Beaconsfield Rd. and 2 other schools within close vicinity to the site where heavy, articulated vehicles should not frequent!

The site itself is within 150 metres of long term residents and operating noise, light and toxic air and water pollutants would destroy the rural / residential and ecological nature of this area! GHD lean on the language that 'the area is zoned for this', which demonstrated huge negligence and oversight when zoned by authority, and little concern for the fragile socioecological nature of this incredible part of our State! The area to the South of Douglas road should never have been considered for such development and the zoning should be reviewed to protect the communities health and safety, immediately and the broader population of our State.

The site sits atop category 2 riparian waterway and is prone to flooding. This flows directly in to the Wingecarribee River, which is a fragile and endemic ecosystem which has resident Platypus' and volumes of other natives within and around. This also flows in to and is within the SYDNEY drinking and water catchment!

The visual impact of this proposal will destroy this beautiful green edge of the Moss Vale community, both day and night with such large buildings and associated lighting, which again has no definitives proposed by GHD. This proposal will have significant adverse impact on the socioecological, community, 'way of life', tourism, health and well being of residents and threatens the nature of the Southern Highlands in general.

This proposal is ill-conceived and can not go ahead! I trust the State Planning department/s will quickly identify that these points raised, as well as countless other short comings in the EIS will deem this application and any similar to it for this area not acceptable or in line with what acceptable land usages within this area.

Regards.

I object to the proposed location of the plasrefine project. This location has rural/ residential homes right next door to the location. There are 3 schools within 2km of the project and an early daycare centre on the very rural road that will be being used to transport the many truck passes this project will bring.

I am concerned about access to the site when the proposal is suggesting 100 to 200 heavy vehicle trucks going through residential areas. This is unacceptable with the many schools within the proposed area, narrow country roads and children walking to school this is a dangerous issue.

There is nothing of this scale of building with the Southern Highlands and having a building that is going to cover acres of land right next to homes (within 200m of homes) is just not the right site. It may be zoned industrial however the scope of this project does not suit the area it is being proposed to be built.

The residential roads around the vicinity of the proposed site cannot cope with that many heavy vehicles. They are also not wide enough.
We fear for our health from the toxic fumes that will come from the facility.
It’s a great thing to be doing the recycling but the position of the site is just not practical on so many levels.

NOT THE RIGHT SITE. A number of major concerns covering environment, water & air quality, social & economic and traffic disturbances have been identified in resarching this EIS. Attched is detailed information on each of these issues.

I work at the preschool at 50 Beaconsfield Road Moss Vale. A quiet country road that the preschool playground fronts. We have 46 children per day so that equates to 102 cars per day moving in and out driveway and parking on the street daily in a 50 metre long space PLUS we have a 20 lot subdivision directly opposite us that has not taken into account the preschool it’s like no one knows we exist. A 20 lot subdivision has the very real potential of adding another 40 cars entering and exiting Beaconsfield Road within the 50 metre strip of road outside of preschool the road is not wide enough for passing traffic as it is cars need to slow down. That’s over a 1000 cars per week negotiating a 50 metre stretch of Beaconsfield Road. The potential of traffic accidents occurring with increase use of road is high PLUS the risk of poorer air and noise quality for children playing in the playground next to Beaconsfield Road is extreme. Children with asthma will be significantly impacted as will very young babies. But even children without asthma could develop environmental asthma because of the pollutes in the air. Also educators working in the preschool will be impacted by the air quality and noise of the trucks and from the plant when the wind blows from the north which is usually during summer.
While I support recycling having this facility next to a preschool is just badly planned and our children have not even been considered. Over a week 46 children per day equals 230 children per week being impacted by poor air quality and excess noise on Beaconsfield Road that equals over a 1000 children over a 5 yr period….
I find that in 2022 that our children are still not being considered and their health is being jeopardised quite disturbing. Also I find it ridiculous that a person has to jump through hoops and it can take 8 months to be approved for a carport but yet a huge scale development can put forward desktop assessments on significant impact on flora and fauna and the environment.
Please reconsider the site it really needs to be a greater distance away from towns and preschools and children.

Thank you for your time,
Peta

I am currently building in Beaconsfield Road close to this proposed waste plastics processing factory. I am very concerned about this development and strongly object. My wife and I will be seriously adversely affected should it be approved.
I object on the main concerns following:
1. That the site is landlocked and there is no access other than via residential Beaconsfield Road and adjoining-residential roads in the North West Moss Vale area. These are residential roads. Beaconsfield Road in particular narrows dangerously to a country lane up the steep hill past my land toward the site. As far as I know the proponents have yet to acquire land for a new access road up from Lackey Road (Figure 2.1 Proposal site location and key haulage routes). If the development is approved, but the new road does NOT eventuate, they will use residential Lytton and Beaconsfield Roads to service operations. This is outrageous and will cause ongoing terrible impositions on the safety and amenity of residents. They should not even be allowed to use this access route for construction let alone operations.
2. The size and scale of the proposed proposed buildings. At 18 metres in height and six hectares in size, this complex will certainly NOT recede into the landscape as my residential build is required to do. The concept sketch in Figure 7.2 is misleading as it does not represent scale.
3. On the EIS proposed plan (Figure 7.1 Concept plastics recycling and reprocessing facility layout) I see only ONE space for truck parking, though the EIS says 8 medium rigid vehicles on site (7-8). Where are all the other untold numbers of semi trailers going to park while they line up and wait to unload and or load? I’ll tell you - they will queue on local streets which will add to noise and air pollution as diesel engines must be kept running for fuel efficiency and aircon use for the comfort of drivers in the extremes of Moss Vale summers and winter. And as there is no other access except via Beaconsfield Road, it will cause grave safety issues for the neighbourhood, including a pre-school on Beaonsfield Road. And at the very least, inconvenience residents’ access to local council roads from their homes.
4. These days truck drivers enter the address in the GPS and follow directions for the most convenient route. There's no guarantee they will stick to the route prescribed in Figure 2.1. So who will monitor the so called haulage routes and number of trucks, let alone enforce them? No one.
This proposal should be denied.

I object to this project. The southern highlands is a tourist destination and already struggles with traffic and this project will make things far worse. I’m concerned about water quality and the impact on air quality. It’s the wrong site for this works. I hav e huge concerns about traffic congestion and also how unsightly the site will be. We don’t need 24 hour trucks impacting our town.